Mr. Bernard Gloster:

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear before it today. I am pleased to join other stakeholders in this session from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. I note that Seas Suas was originally on the schedule but its representatives are not able to be here today. I am joined by my colleagues, Dr. Caroline Cullen, director of quality assurance at Tusla, and Ms Fiona McDonnell, service director for our national children’s services regulation. I welcome the debate and opportunity to discuss aspects of this plan. Tusla welcomes the plan primarily from the perspectives relative to our functions in two areas. We are a statutory provider of child and family support services and we are also the regulator of early years' services and an increasing number of discrete specialist services that come within the remit of our children’s services regulation. From both the perspective of a provider and a regulator, we welcome the opportunity to discuss this policy.

There is little doubt that an increasing body of research demonstrates the value to children and families of the provision of quality, accessible, flexible and supported childcare options. This has been matched over the past decade with an enormous change in the landscape of provision for early years' care. Some 4,184 providers were registered with Tusla at the end of April this year. The majority of these are now operating within, and inspected under, the regulatory provisions established in 2016. There is little doubt that this is a sector that has transformed in a decade and our evidence, supported by research, continues to demonstrate an increasingly compliant sector working to very high standards.

There is also no doubt that with regulation comes challenges. When I last addressed this subject matter at this committee's predecessor in late 2019, shortly after taking up the post of Tusla chief executive officer, CEO, the sector had again come through a period of intense commentary and focus. This centred on what regulation could and could not achieve with the resulting challenges for all of society but, most notably, parents, for whom choice of day care for their children can feature among the most significant decisions they make. It is important to recognise from that period that regulation, while driving improvement, can never guarantee absolute compliance or fail-safe services. We have, and are likely to see in future, failings, poor standards and shortcomings in a small number of situations.

At that time, I committed to undertaking changes to improve our engagement and support for parents. Since that time, we have introduced a parental feedback process to enable parents to provide us with information related to the service their children attend. They can now give us this information at inspection time or at any time. We now also publish the date inspection was undertaken, even before the reports are published, so parents are aware that an inspection of their child's service has taken place. We also committed to undertake research to learn more about how we are doing and have published and shared across differing forums the following three reports in February of this year: Tusla Early Years Inspections-Parents Consultation; Report of Early Years Inspection Reports 2018-2019: Analysis and Trends; and Report of the Early Years Regulatory Enforcement Process-Outcomes.

At the end of 2019, most providers were coming to the end of their first three-year registration cycle under the 2016 regulations and, in the main, were successfully re-registered as the year closed. The challenges experienced by the sector, for parents and public confidence, led to a narrative at the time of re-registration of a sector that was over-regulated, when four months earlier the suggestion was that it was under-regulated. This is an important context as we now face the next seven years of the plan for childminding.

Childminding, mainly provided by a person in his or her own home to children coming to him or her, is the last remaining modality of early years' care required to be addressed in detailed policy, not just regulation. The plan is welcome for this reason in that it brings to life an incremental approach to policy in action. With some estimating that 15,000 non-relative childminding arrangements are in place today, as referenced in the policy document, the option clearly is meeting a need. Tusla fully supports the plan, which aims to strengthen recognition of these minders, support the choice of parents who use childminding, make it affordable, increase access and enhance quality of provision. Parents, communities and society as a whole benefit from these improvements, but particularly children. Childminding and formal early years' settings, such as crèches and preschools, do not need to be a stark either-or contrast but simply more of a mix and range of options, all supported and encouraged to improve in a sensible and regulated context.

Childminding, regardless of the setting, relies on the skill and dedication of the people doing the minding. Whether trained childcare workers in formal early years' settings or childminders in the home, recognition of the importance of the work, reflected in terms, conditions, opportunities and training, must also be at the fore of any policy approach to this sector. While not the primary concern of Tusla as a regulator, it is of concern to all that the importance of this work is not underestimated.

We are very conscious that childminding environments have several important elements that set them apart from other types of early years' provision. Childminders usually operate from family homes and cater for much smaller numbers of children compared with other settings. It is important that a homely environment is maintained and that the fabric of the home is not fundamentally altered. We welcome the development and implementation of regulations, which will acknowledge the unique circumstances in which childminding services operate and at the same time ensure that those services provide consistently high-quality and safe environments for the children who attend them.

There are currently 84 registered childminders and we look forward to building this number through engagement over the coming years as we prepare for the future regulation of the service. We believe this will be of benefit to parents and children and that there are many benefits that registration can provide. The reality is that with 84 registered out of a much larger number, there is clear need for this overall plan not only to recognise this sector but to ensure the greatest possible benefit to children.

Prior to the publication of our quality regulatory framework for childminders in 2018, we engaged with Childminding Ireland, childminders and parents in its development. This resource clearly sets out how Tusla assesses childminders for compliance with current regulation. Our annual and inspection analysis reports published on our website show that childminders are found compliant with most regulations. This, we hope, is an encouragement to the many childminders who will come within the scope of regulation over the life of this plan. In 2020 we introduced an e-learning programme on the quality regulatory framework for providers, stakeholders and students. To date, out of 8,674 who have undertaken the online training, 8,000 are staff working in services of whom 74 are childminders.

This approach is one that Tusla is committed to pursuing where we are a regulator clearly focused on enabling continuous improvement.

In 2020 we undertook a review of the registration, regulation, inspection and enforcement of the childminding sector in six international jurisdictions. The findings from the review identified that there is a range of approaches to the regulation of childminding and differing requirements, for example, in qualifications and training. These findings, combined with our understanding of the Irish childminding context, will support us to ensure that the registration and inspection of childminders in Ireland is proportionate, effective and consistent in assessing the care and safety of children in a childminder's home. Home-based care, as distinct from centre-based care, will be possible to regulate and inspect. However, we need to have a conversation about what we expect from regulation. If it is based on an absolute guarantee with no faults - a complete risk averse approach - then it will likely fail and remove the very aspiration of the policy, which is care in a relationship-based home-from-home family life environment. If, however, it is based on reasonable measurable standards, recognising the home environment and focused on the care and well-being of the child, it is likely to lead to a high quality, strong and sustainable option for parents and children into the future. Tusla, as an agency with a direct interest in child welfare and family support and as an early years regulator, welcomes the action plan being advanced by the Minister and we will play an active part in its development and implementation.